[SH] Treat SH2A as superscalar

[SH] Treat SH2A as superscalar

[Oleg Endo]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 849 bytes --]

Hello,

The SH2A is actually superscalar and thus it might be better to treat it
as such for scheduling.  It also is a harvard arch, but after adding it
to the TARGET_HARVARD arch, I've noticed that the macro is only used as
a parameter for instruction cache invalidation.  Maybe it's better to
remove that term from the backend.
Tested on rev 193061 with
make -k check RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board=sh-sim
\{-m2/-ml,-m2/-mb,-m2a/-mb,-m4/-ml,-m4/-mb,-m4a/-ml,-m4a/-mb}"

and no new failures.
OK?

Cheers,
Oleg

gcc/ChangeLog:

	* config/sh/sh.h (TARGET_CACHE32, TARGET_HARVARD): Delete macro.
	(TARGET_SUPERSCALAR): Add TARGET_SH2A.
	(CACHE_LOG): Use TARGET_HARD_SH4 and TARGET_SH5 instead of 
	TARGET_CACHE32.
	(TRAMPOLINE_ALIGNMENT): Use TARGET_HARD_SH4 and TARGET_SH5 
	instead of TARGET_HARVARD.
	* config/sh/sh.c (sh_trampoline_init): Likewise.

[-- Attachment #2: sh2a_superscalar.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 2442 bytes --]

Index: gcc/config/sh/sh.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/config/sh/sh.c	(revision 193061)
+++ gcc/config/sh/sh.c	(working copy)
@@ -11524,7 +11524,7 @@
 				SImode));
   emit_move_insn (adjust_address (tramp_mem, SImode, 8), cxt);
   emit_move_insn (adjust_address (tramp_mem, SImode, 12), fnaddr);
-  if (TARGET_HARVARD)
+  if (TARGET_HARD_SH4 || TARGET_SH5)
     {
       if (!TARGET_INLINE_IC_INVALIDATE
 	  || (!(TARGET_SH4A_ARCH || TARGET_SH4_300) && TARGET_USERMODE))
Index: gcc/config/sh/sh.h
===================================================================
--- gcc/config/sh/sh.h	(revision 193061)
+++ gcc/config/sh/sh.h	(working copy)
@@ -58,15 +58,9 @@
 /* Nonzero if we should generate code using type 3E insns.  */
 #define TARGET_SH3E (TARGET_SH3 && TARGET_SH_E)
 
-/* Nonzero if the cache line size is 32.  */
-#define TARGET_CACHE32 (TARGET_HARD_SH4 || TARGET_SH5)
-
 /* Nonzero if we schedule for a superscalar implementation.  */
-#define TARGET_SUPERSCALAR TARGET_HARD_SH4
+#define TARGET_SUPERSCALAR (TARGET_HARD_SH4 || TARGET_SH2A)
 
-/* Nonzero if the target has separate instruction and data caches.  */
-#define TARGET_HARVARD (TARGET_HARD_SH4 || TARGET_SH5)
-
 /* Nonzero if a double-precision FPU is available.  */
 #define TARGET_FPU_DOUBLE \
   ((target_flags & MASK_SH4) != 0 || TARGET_SH2A_DOUBLE)
@@ -461,7 +455,7 @@
 /* The log (base 2) of the cache line size, in bytes.  Processors prior to
    SH2 have no actual cache, but they fetch code in chunks of 4 bytes.
    The SH2/3 have 16 byte cache lines, and the SH4 has a 32 byte cache line */
-#define CACHE_LOG (TARGET_CACHE32 ? 5 : TARGET_SH2 ? 4 : 2)
+#define CACHE_LOG ((TARGET_HARD_SH4 || TARGET_SH5) ? 5 : TARGET_SH2 ? 4 : 2)
 
 /* ABI given & required minimum allocation boundary (in *bits*) for the
    code of a function.  */
@@ -1575,9 +1569,10 @@
 /* Length in units of the trampoline for entering a nested function.  */
 #define TRAMPOLINE_SIZE  (TARGET_SHMEDIA64 ? 40 : TARGET_SH5 ? 24 : 16)
 
-/* Alignment required for a trampoline in bits .  */
+/* Alignment required for a trampoline in bits.  */
 #define TRAMPOLINE_ALIGNMENT \
-  ((CACHE_LOG < 3 || (optimize_size && ! TARGET_HARVARD)) ? 32 \
+  ((CACHE_LOG < 3 \
+    || (optimize_size && ! (TARGET_HARD_SH4 || TARGET_SH5))) ? 32 \
    : TARGET_SHMEDIA ? 256 : 64)
 
 /* A C expression whose value is RTL representing the value of the return

Re: [SH] Treat SH2A as superscalar

[Kaz Kojima]

Oleg Endo <oleg.endo@t-online.de> wrote:
> The SH2A is actually superscalar and thus it might be better to treat it
> as such for scheduling.  It also is a harvard arch, but after adding it
> to the TARGET_HARVARD arch, I've noticed that the macro is only used as
> a parameter for instruction cache invalidation.  Maybe it's better to
> remove that term from the backend.
> Tested on rev 193061 with
> make -k check RUNTESTFLAGS="--target_board=sh-sim
> \{-m2/-ml,-m2/-mb,-m2a/-mb,-m4/-ml,-m4/-mb,-m4a/-ml,-m4a/-mb}"
> 
> and no new failures.
> OK?

OK.

Regards,
	kaz